Line:'By the numbers, Alex
(Lange) is in the 99th percentile for height and weight for babies his age.
Insurers don't take babies above the 95th percentile, no matter how healthy they
are otherwise. "I could understand if we could control what he's
eating. But he's 4 months old. He's breast-feeding. We can't put him on the
Atkins diet or on a treadmill," joked his frustrated father, Bernie
Lange...'

* Insurer revoked HIV Patients coverage Reuters 03/17/10

I will grant you healthcare reform is not perfect.

But
it is better than being dropped from your insurance if you find out you have a
terminal disease.

'Yesterday, an investigation by Reuters revealed that
Wellpoint routinely drops coverage of women with breast cancer. According to the
report, Wellpoint used a computer algorithm that automatically targeted...'

Fortunately, the American people have more common sense than many senators.

Congress will simply zero fund this monstrosity, the House will vote to
repeal and the American people will see who is really on their side--not the
Dems.

The American people have the right to self determination.
They don't want Obamacare. Obama, Pelosi and Reid have no concern about what
the people want. They are only concerned about their own leftist agenda. IT'S
SCARY.

We need TRUE health care reform and not this disaster known as
Obamacare.

"In Illinois, a pharmacist closes his business because of late Medicaid
payments. In Arizona, a young father's liver transplant is canceled because
Medicaid suddenly won't pay for it. In California, dentists pull teeth that
could be saved because Medicaid doesn't pay for root canals"

"In its 2009 National
Health Insurer Report Card, the AMA reports that Medicare denied only 4% of
claimsa big improvement, but outpaced better still by the private insurers. The
prior years high private denier, Aetna, reduced denials to 1.81%an astounding
75% improvementwith similar declines by all other private insurers, to average
only 2.79%."

Seems like your life is at risk more with
Government insurance than with private.

Our Health Insurance Reform may be repealed by the house right now, but it will
never be repealed by the Senate and it won't down the road either. It isn't
perfect (and the Republicans don't have a perfect solution either) But it's a
start and will take us on our way to better health insurance coverage. The
biggest thing people don't understand is that it is mostly about denying people
coverage due to pre-existing conditions and about the hardship and sometimes,
even bankruptsy due to medical bills. This is not civilized in the greatest
country in the world! Many other countries already have provisions for these
things and we need to catch up to them if we want to continue to be that
advanced country.

Sorry GOP (freshman), it's the "Baby-Boomer Retirement Wave" that's in
charge in 2012 also. Eager to show who's now in charge, the House's new
Republican majority plans to vote to repeal President Barack Obama's landmark
health care overhaul before he even shows up in their chamber to give his State
of the Union address. You paid your Medicare taxes all those years and think
you deserve your money's worth: full benefits after you retire. Nearly three
out of five people say in a recent Associated Press-GfK poll that they paid into
the system so their benefits shouldn't be cut. But a newly updated financial
analysis shows that what people paid into the system doesn't come close to
covering the full value of the medical care they can expect to receive as
retirees. Consider an average-wage, two-earner couple together earning $89,000
a year. Upon retiring in 2011, they would have paid $114,000 in Medicare payroll
taxes during their careers. But they can expect to receive medical services
from prescriptions to hospital care worth $355,000, or about three times what
they put in.

Extreme ideological politics buy us very little. I'm a conservative who also
recognizes the fact that health care costs are eating the middle class alive.

Obamacare did nothing to address the true cost drivers of
healthcare. It was benefit side only. They also totally inaccurately made the
private health insurance industry with a 1.6% profit margin the scapegoat for
these rising healthcare costs.

To really get at the costs, we need
state based reforms that fit the situations in each state. MA is not UT.

Having said that, it is very unfortunate that my party really is
becoming the party of "no." We don't offer any realistic solutions
anymore. We did have some pretty good market based ideas on how to slow rising
healthcare costs.

Now all we can do is threaten to repeal Obamacare,
with an eye to 2012 elections and gaining more power. Fine! But what is our plan
to address the core problem? Before we repeal the democratic solution shouldn't
we have a plan B?

Ultimately, the Republican, (tea-ed-off party)
will not be successful if it doesn't have it's own detailed plans for market
based solutions.

'Now all we can do is threaten to repeal Obamacare, with an eye to 2012
elections and gaining more power. Fine! But what is our plan to address the core
problem? Before we repeal the democratic solution shouldn't we have a plan B?' -
facts_r_stubborn | 2:17 p.m.

THANK you!

Facts, your a
self-identified conservative, I'm a self-identified liberal, and I completely
agree with this statement.

Going forward from this, a state-by-state
option would be very confusing and, at some points I'm sure, contradictory.

facts_r_stubborn - I am with you. I have no problem repealing Obamacare, or
amending it, so long as there is a better alternative. But you don't take away
something, leaving a void for a couple of years while you figure it out. That
would cause companies to have to retool what they are offering three time - and
each time you change things up, it cost companies money.

The
pragmatic way to deal with this is to repeal and replace those sections that
don't work. We don't need revolutionary change, but evolutionary change.

I would love to see what the Republicans have in mind - as a package.
Unfortunately up to right now, this grand plan only exist in someones head and
there is nothing to look at yet.

Having a show vote with no plan is
yet another battle taken where time would be better spent actually doing
productive work toward a real solution, or on other initiatives that truly do
need our attention.

Remember Jobs... that still needs to be fixed.
This battle will do nothing to advance that issue.

I'm glad we agree on that point. Something for you to
consider, though:

Unfunded mandates are not particularly effective
historically. This is not a partisan issue. Utah has been heavily Republican, as
we all know, since the 70's, but still the state legislature issues unfunded
mandates to county and city governments. The federal government does the same to
the states, and even several Democratic states are whining they can't afford the
implementation of Obamacare.

I don't say the federal government
should have no role in reforming healtcare regulation to encourage cost savings
and availability of coverage. I do say they should not prescribe the exact
method for each state. In other words, set the general expectations for slowing
the rise in the cost of healtcare, increasing the number of insured, and basic
benefits. Then, hands off and let the states flush out the details appropriate
to reach the general federal targets.

It's federalism at its best
and Jefferson and Madison would have been proud.

We can still do that
without repealing the whole enchilada. Let's learn from the real world and
adjust where needed.

I'm all for full repeal of Obamacare however there needs to be some common sense
reforms proposed for health care because it is horribly expensive and there are
too many who need coverage that have a hard time getting it such as married
college students and those who are out of work.

Yes, Medicare supposedly covers 45 million and it is,
according to your own pathetic democratic liberal party, "on the road to
bankruptcy.

So lets expand it for everyone!!!

That seems
realistic to me. I mean we obviously can't fund what we are trying to provide
now and obama openly admits there are billions in fraud in abuse while covering
the measly 45 million. They can't control or monitor or stop it.

Democrats solution? Coverage for everyone!!!

I'm sure that would
be real efficient and affordable. Not.

The whole concept is a
failure based on the first premise. Yes, lets provide healthcare to over 300
000 000 people since we can't afford to provide it to the 45 million currently
involved.

This is how democrats think and that is why the last 110th
democratic congress in on record for amassing more debt than the first 100
congresses COMBINED!

Mr. Obama's agenda is the magnet for unintended consequences. His isolation from
reality, now and in his previous experiences, makes him vulnerable. The blinders
that his rigid progressive views impose removes him from the real world. Pagan's
cut-and-paste examples in the insurance industry are a telling.

"The strategy is not risk-free for the Republicans, who won't have a
replacement plan of their own ready by the time of the repeal vote."

Ya think? That's what the Republican party does best. They had how
many opportunities to try and address Health Care under Republican control and
did nothing. They want nothing done, period. Did they really want the issue
addressed, they would have done so at the numerous opportunities they had. They
blocked Clinton's attempts, did everything they could to block Obama's attempts,
will (unsuccessfully) try to repeal Obama's attempts, and still have no answer
themselves.

So the democrat's biggest accomplishment last year was an attempt to improve
health care for the non wealthy, while the republican's biggest victory was the
extension of Bush's tax breaks to the those making over $200,000 per year.

As a middle class independent I'm having a hard time believing that
Republicans have the best interests of the middle class in mind.

I
skeptical about Obamacare but at least it is an attempt to help out the middle
class. Can a republican please explain to me how giving the rich massive tax
breaks helps the middle class?

Last elections I voted about 60% to
40% in favor of democrats, but if republicans don't start putting the best
interests of the middle class ahead of the rich's I'm might just become a
democrat.